Urban Stream Corridor Management in the United States: The Interaction of Ecology and Policy

美国城市河道管理：生态与政策的相互作用

• 批准号: 0201409
• 负责人: Rutherford Platt
• 金额: $ 20.88万
• 依托单位: University of Massachusetts Amherst
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2002
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2002-07-01 至 2005-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0201409&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Urban; Stream; Corridor; Management; United

Since 1950, metropolitan regions of the United States have nearly tripled in population from 84 million (55% of U.S. total) to 226 million in 2000 (80%). During the same period, the number of designated metropolitan regions grew from 169 to 347 and their aggregate land area doubled from 9% to about 19% of the lower 48 states. As metropolitan regions have expanded, land development has degraded and disrupted natural drainage systems, watersheds, wetlands, aquifers, and coastal estuaries. In the process, natural stormwater detention, water quality filtering, biotic habitat, water-based recreation, and scenic amenity have been impaired. Efforts to replace these "Nature's services" through technology, as with flood control projects and water treatment plants, have proven costly, environmentally damaging, and sometimes ineffective. This dismal process was challenged in the 1960s by scientists, environmentalists, and other writers (e.g., Eugene Odum, Garrett Hardin, William H. Whyte, Barry Commoner, Gilbert White, Ian McHarg, Luna Leopold, William Neiring, and John and Mildred Teal). In response, certain cities and metropolitan regions have attempted in McHarg's phrase to "design with Nature" rather than trying to overwhelm biophysical constraints through technology. This shift is tentative, geographically uneven, and poorly documented. But its results are evident in the form of widely established stream corridor "greenways," "daylighting" of channelized streams, floodplain and wetlands management, building regulations for steep slopes, and urban forestry programs. These and related initiatives may be subsumed in the broad rubric of "urban watershed management" for purposes of this study.Since watersheds typically embrace multiple political and ownership units, watershed management requires creative use of partnerships, special districts, and other regional strategies. Urban watershed management is also influenced, for better or worse, by federal laws such as the Clean Water Act, the National Flood Insurance Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act. This study will analyze and compare regional experience in urban watershed and estuary management in light of scientific and institutional challenges. Research questions that will guide the study include:1. What alternative institutional models are available to overcome legal fragmentation in urban watersheds and estuaries?2. What indicators of "effectiveness" may be applied to the models identified in Question 1?3. How and to what extent do federal programs encourage or inhibit urban watershed and estuary management?4. What is the influence of the "property rights movement" and the "takings issue" as constraints upon governmental efforts to retain natural functions of urban watersheds? The study will assess comparative regional experience in urban watershed management through four broad tasks:Task 1 -- Survey of State of Practice: A sample of state and regional resource managers stratified by geographic area and discipline will be surveyed regarding the above questions in relation to their respective geographic localities;Task 2 -- Regional Workshops will be conducted in 3-5 representative metropolitan areas to ascertain more detailed local and regional experience in multi-objective management of urban watersheds, stream corridors, and estuaries;Task 3 -- Detailed Case Studies will more closely analyze selected programs identified in the earlier tasks that representative a spectrum of geographical context and institutional strategies of broader significance;Task 4 - Publication and Dissemination of Results through a book, scholarly articles, and conference papers.

自1950年以来，美国大都市地区的人口几乎增加了两倍，从8400万人(占美国总人口的55%)增加到2000年的2.26亿人(80%)。在同一时期，指定的大都市区的数量从169个增加到347个，其土地总面积翻了一番，从较低的48个州的9%增加到约19%。随着大都市地区的扩张，土地开发退化并扰乱了自然排水系统、流域、湿地、含水层和沿海河口。在这个过程中，自然雨水滞留、水质过滤、生物栖息地、水基娱乐和风景舒适性都受到了损害。通过技术取代这些“自然服务”的努力，如防洪工程和水处理厂，已被证明是昂贵的、破坏环境的，有时甚至无效。这一令人沮丧的过程在20世纪60年代受到了科学家、环保主义者和其他作家(如尤金·奥德姆、加勒特·哈丁、威廉·H·怀特、巴里·康蒙纳、吉尔伯特·怀特、伊恩·麦克哈格、露娜·利奥波德、威廉·内林以及约翰和米尔德里德·蒂尔)的挑战。作为回应，某些城市和大都会地区试图用麦克哈格的话说，“与自然一起设计”，而不是试图通过技术来压倒生物物理限制。这种转变是试探性的，地理位置参差不齐，而且缺乏记录。但其结果在广泛建立的河流走廊“绿道”、渠化溪流的“采光”、泛滥平原和湿地管理、陡坡建筑法规和城市林业计划等方面都是显而易见的。就本研究而言，这些举措和相关举措可以归入“城市流域管理”这一大类。由于流域通常包含多个政治和所有权单位，流域管理需要创造性地使用伙伴关系、特别地区和其他区域战略。城市流域管理也受到联邦法律的影响，无论是好是坏，如《清洁水法》、《国家洪水保险法》、《海岸带管理法》和《安全饮用水法》。这项研究将从科学和制度挑战的角度分析和比较城市流域和河口管理的区域经验。将指导这项研究的研究问题包括：1.有哪些替代的制度模式可以克服城市流域和河口的法律碎片化？2.什么“有效性”指标可以应用于问题1中确定的模型？3.联邦计划如何鼓励或在多大程度上抑制城市流域和河口的管理？4.作为限制政府努力保留城市流域的自然功能的“产权运动”和“征用问题”的影响是什么？这项研究将通过四项广泛的任务评估在城市流域管理方面的比较区域经验：任务1--实践状况概览：将就上述问题对按地理区域和学科分层的州和区域资源管理者进行抽样调查；任务2--将在3-5个具有代表性的大都市地区举办区域讲习班，以确定在城市流域、河流走廊和河口多目标管理方面更详细的地方和区域经验；任务3--详细的案例研究将更密切地分析先前任务中确定的代表一系列具有更广泛意义的地理背景和体制战略的选定方案；任务4-通过一本书、学术文章和会议论文出版和传播成果。